A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Sunday, August 13, 2017
The Resignation: Nothing to be proud of, or to boast of ushering a new culture
by Rajan Philips-August 12, 2017, 7:16 pm
Ravi Karunanayake was defiantly proud of his decision to resign from his
portfolio, asserting in parliament that he was doing it for the sake of
the government and good governance. No sooner, the Prime Minister was
on his feet claiming credit for ushering in a new culture, where
Ministers will resign without interfering with the judicial process.
There was nothing to be proud of, for he had no alternative but to
resign. The pressure was not only on the Minister to resign, but also on
the President to fire the Minister if he did not resign. Even UNPers
had indicated to the Prime Minister that they would not support the
Minister if the No Confidence Motion against the Minister came to vote
in parliament. The government managed to use the sub judice bluff to
delay the NC motion being taken up for debate, but it could not have
delayed it indefinitely.
There is no basis either for claiming that a new governance culture is
being born just because Minister Karunanayake has resigned. Nothing that
led to his resignation has been explained or answered. Explanations and
answers await the findings and conclusions of the Commission of
Inquiry. The only good thing that has happened so far on this sordid
bond scam matter is the appointment of the ongoing Commission. The
Commissioners, and their knowledge and questionings are a blast of fresh
air after two years of bluff and bluster. They have been able to stem
the adversarial exuberance of literate lawyers, and cut through mumbo
jumbo answers suggesting some kind of oracular wizardry in using global
financial data to perpetually succeed in bond auctioning in Colombo. One
would hope that the Commissioners are given the time to ask and find
answers to all hitherto unasked and unanswered questions.
In fairness to Ravi Karunanayake, the matter over which he was proud to
resign is not the centre piece of the bond scandal. The source of his
undoing is a penthouse sideshow that should have never happened. There
is surprising misunderstanding about criminal culpability and
ministerial probity. The latter involves a much lower bar to judge than
the former. For someone to be a minister, she or he must not only be
incorrupt but also appear to be incorrupt. Given his circumstances, Mr.
Karunanayake could not have continued as Minister until he is found
guilty by a competent court. The penthouse matter may never go to court
but the Minister had to go for all the implications that he has tied up
with - unknowingly or otherwise.
But the bond matter goes beyond the former minister and the penthouse.
In fact, it started even before the present government. The public has a
stake and interest in knowing if the current inquiry will be mandated
to canvass everything in bond auctioning that happened under the
previous government. If not, why not? Will there be a separate inquiry,
consistent with the new culture that the Prime Minister has in mind?
Otherwise, there will be no new culture but the continuation of the same
old quid-pro-quo culture binding the Rajapaksas and UNP leaders, as
many have suspected and suggested.
And any positively new culture must also facilitate answers as to why
the present government gazetted the Central Bank out of the Finance
Ministry not only breaking with tradition but also creating
jurisdictional questions involving the Finance Ministry, the Monetary
Board and the Central Bank? Were there connections between the gazetted
relocation of the bank, the choice of the new Governor, and the bond
auctions that followed? How did the government and Central Bank decide
on the money that needed to be raised through the issuance of bonds? Was
election campaign financing a consideration in the requirement for
money? Who were the ministers and others involved in these discussions
and decisions? Will the public have the opportunity to hear from each
and every one of them, including the Prime Minister? As has been
ruefully suggested, what we have is a ‘large government’ and so far only
one minister has been summoned to the dock. Needless to add, there is
not only a large government, but also a super-large cabinet.
New Culture: Requisites and Prospects
In my article last week, I suggested that the introduction of the open
economy has provided a new platform and impetus for corruption on a
scale and style unlike anything before. Although I indicated that that
it is not the open economy that is to be faulted but its crony
beneficiaries and their political benefactors, I did not elaborate on
the faultlessness of many who participated in the open economy and
benefited from and contributed to it while keeping their hands
scrupulously clean and without breaking the law in any way.
Hundreds of entrepreneurs and professionals have been participating in
the open economy cleanly and legitimately creating jobs, contributing to
the national economy, paying taxes and earning legitimate profits. They
have created new export oriented industries and found markets for their
products without much help by way of systematic government support.
Tens of thousands of people are benefiting from these industries as
employees, and contributing to the economy. Ironically, it is the
Employees’ Provident Fund savings of these workers that has come under
frequent threats from the bond operations of the Central Bank that is
supposed to the guardian of these savings.
Any new culture must be grounded on the success and experience of the
faultless participants in the open economy, while isolating and
rejecting the inducements of crony beneficiaries and political
benefactors. There cannot be any new culture without reforming the
current procurement and tender practices associated with government
purchases and contracts. These practices are not only corrupt but will
also result in substandard purchases and infrastructure with
questionable economic benefits, risks public safety and the creation of
environmental hazards. The new culture must also be predicated on a new
system of priorities giving due weight to the traditional sectors of the
economy that support large sections of the population, and due scrutiny
to property developments promoted by speculators.
Before asserting the birth of a new culture in Parliament, the Prime
Minister issued a warning at a political rally in Hatton that "there is
no place for thieves in the UNP". His illustrious kinsman and mentor,
President Jayewardene was more realistic and honest when he famously
confessed in 1981 after ethnic rioting and looting in the Sabragamuwa
Province, that the UNP is a big tent party and so it invariably includes
within its ranks: rogues, thieves, criminals and murderers. To this
‘blue collar’ list must be added the ‘white collar’ thieves. Successive
governments have since 1977 have been aiding and abetting both
categories – from underworld criminals to fraudulent businesses.
The system became institutionalized with the blurring of the boundaries
between government and opposition. The same MPs are in both places and
they have not been inclined to rock either boat too much. To multiply
the metaphor, the ongoing inquiry revelations and the ministerial
resignation would appear to have started rocking every boat in
parliament. Waves are coming from the outside into parliament, and not
the other way around.
The Joint Opposition that staged rally after rally to ‘bring back
Mahinda’ is not rushing to rouse the people against the government on
the bond issue. It is known that the Rajapaksas were not overly keen
about bringing up the No Confidence against Minister Karunanayake.
Likewise, many UNPers were not at all keen about defending the
beleaguered minister. The JVP finally decided to start directly
questioning the role of the Prime Minister in the bond scandal. The TNA
would have been in utter quandary if the No Confidence motion had been
taken for debate and vote. How long can the TNA sit on the fence between
political corruption and constitutional promises? The TNA has its own
hands full with corruption allegations rocking the Northern Provincial
Council. The President has told his cabinet that he has done everything
he could to fulfill his promise to expose and end corruption in
government, past and present. The ball is on the Prime Minister’s court.
All these are not signs of a new culture being born, but of an old
culture in crisis.